How cited: Masayesva v. Zah · Go Syfert

Masayesva v. Zah (1992)

green · 32 citation events across 3 courts. Showing the 4 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1995 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
199520102026
Rule Authority · 9th Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
However, the court later determined that "there was evidence of [two] Hopi sites north of Moenkopi Wash." Masayesva, 816 F.Supp. at 1399 (emphasis in original). 68 The Hopis claim that there was "substantial evidence" that Hopis grazed livestock north of Moenkopi Wash in 1934.
emphasis in original
green Masayesva v. Zah (1995)
Rule Authority · 9th Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
However, the court later determined that “there was evidence of [two] Hopi sites north of Moenkopi Wash.” Masayesva, 816 F.Supp. at 1399 (emphasis in original).
emphasis in original
Cited · Fed. Cir. · signal: see
See Masayesva v. Zah, 816 F.Supp. 1387, 1415 (D.Ariz.1992) (explaining that “[t]he Bennett Freeze was intended to protect the interests of the Hopi Tribe pending any negotiated, congressional, or court resolution of Hopi and Navajo property interests in the 1934 Reservation”).
Cited (see also) · Fed. Cl. · signal: see, e.g.
See e.g., Masayesva v. Zah, 816 F.Supp. 1387, 1415-1417 (D.Ariz.1992) (lifting freeze because “Hopi Tribe pointed to only three Bennett Freeze violations of new construction, versus replacement of old homes or repairs.